The Flames slow start, unfortunate early injuries and subsequent spanking at the hands of the Vancouver Canucks recently has caused the rebuild debate to rear its ugly head in Flamesland again. This is an inevitability until the club does one of two things: takes a firm step forward and becomes a meaningful contender again or bottoms out completely and starts from scratch out of necessity.

Even though the club currently finds itself in 14th in the conference, Calgary's start to 2013 has nonetheless muddied the waters no matter what side of the debate you fall on. On the one hand, the Flames have decent underlying numbers, have frequently outshot their opponents and it has only been bad luck or lousy goaltending that has sunk them to the bottom of the Western Conference.

On the other hand, the Flames are who we thought they are. There's been some improvement over the past Brent Sutter iterations of the club thanks to summer additions, the coaching staff and the progression of guys like Backlund and Brodie, but the truth is the team remains fundamentally flawed in a number of key areas. The top-end of the roster is expensive and aging, and there is a dearth of players at or near their prime age. And although the emergence of Baertschi and Gaudreau as potential bluechip prospects the last year or so is a good development, the truth is the Flames organizational cupboard is hardly bursting with talent.

Furthermore, Calgary's depth at center has been exposed as woefully lacking with the injury to Backlund recently. Center depth has always been a bone of contention in town, but there's no doubt with Alex Tanguay, Ben Street, Matt Stajan and Blair Jones currently counting as the Flames top-4 pivots at the NHL level, things haven't been this dire down the middle in Calgary in the post-lockout (both of them) era. Particularly since the coach is forced to play converted 32-year old winger Tanguay out as the club's power vs power option most nights.

Rebuild Continuum

While rebuilding vs. competing is often conceptualized as a dichotomy, I've mentioned previously I think it's better to think of it as a continuum, particularly since the act of building and maintaining a roster is on-going and perpetual. Technically all GM's are always looking to improve their teams at all times, but the motivations and moves will change depending on where they fall on that continuum.

The Flames are stuck solidly in the middle of that sliding gradient. They have enough quality NHLers to beat up bad teams, can compete solidly on many nights with good teams and occasionally beat the big boys. They also have a near complete lack of elite talent in the organization, whether we're talking active bobdies or guys in the pipeline (Baertschi and Gaudreau notwithstanding). The remaining, yet unanswered question is how they move forward without falling off a cliff.

Personally, I am paradoxically encouraged by the Flames start despite the poor record, the last two uninspired losses notwithstanding. Not to say that Calgary is suddenly a contender again, only that a quick turnaround is at least possible with some luck and prudent management. In the depths of the team's struggles under Brent Sutter last season I was mostly convinced the club would have to run aground completely before the ship could be righted, but the Bob Hartley version of the Flames seems to have nodes of hope around which the org could begin to build around. The blueline is strong, there is capable talent on the wings and the coaching staff at least seem to have things in order.

In short: I don't think the team has to be terrible in order to get better.

The Post-Iginla Identity

Perhaps the greatest misconception I notice in the rebuild/don't rebuild debate is the idea that trading Iginla or somehow proceeding without him (and Kipper for that matter) is necessarily indicative of a "tear-down". That is, if Iginla is moved at the deadline then the club might as well trade the rest of their veteran talent and burn the thing to the foundation.

This is predicated on the conditioned notion that the Flames simply can't compete without Iginla on the roster; that he remains the center tent pole of the Flames big top. This is also apparently the misconception under which management labors given their reluctance to even consider an Iginla trade (although that is probably informed by other considerations as well. No one wants to be the guy who traded Jarome out of Calgary, particularly if the return doesn't work out. Those kind of moves stick to a GM's resume forever).

Iginla remains a capable enough player who can put up some points and play a lot of minutes. But he's not elite anymore and he won't be getting any better as time moves on. Ideally he's a complementary piece on a good team. On the Flames, because he plays all night and gets a ton of PP time, he's probably a 10-13 GVT (goals versus threshold) player as things stand over a full season, comparable to guys like David Krejci, Blake Wheeler and Martin Erat last year. That means he's worth about two wins per 82 games more than your typical replacement level player. That's something, but it doesn't turn a lousy team into a good one, nor a good team into a basement dweller.

The Flames fortunes don't necessarily turn on the presence of Jarome anymore. Once upon a time that was undeniably true and his long history as the club's lone, implacable, elite forward is why his presence seems persistently crucial to the line-up. It doesn't help perceptions that the team has been unable to internally groom a replacement or two to take the torch from Jarome's hands as he ages, but the fact remains the bottom wouldn't suddenly fall out if Feaster finally decided to leverage Iginla for a good return. At least, no moreso than it would anyways.

That realization gives the organization options. Trading Iginla or Kipper isn't an acknowledgement that the club is terrible and needs to be ripped apart at the seams. Meaning, an Iginla trade doesn't have to inexorably result in a cascade of other trades where the org liquidates Bouwmeester, Cammalleri, Tanguay, Giordano, Hudler, Wideman, etc. because, hey! they are going to suck anyways, right?

Let's be very clear then: the Flames aren't too bad now, they can continue to be not too bad even without Iginla and they therefore have an opportunity to leverage an asset or two and avoid a full tear down in favor of a quicker re-stock.

Moving Forward

Trading Iginla or Kiprusoff as they near the end of their tenure here isn't absolutely required either. What is needed is the Flames management to alter the staid and stagnant formula which has been used to create the roster over the last decade: namely, build around the iconic Iggy and Kipper. Erect them as untouchable pillars in the line-up and assume with the right alchemy the rest of the team will come together behind them and experience some sort of renaissance.

Those days are past. The Flames have plenty of good to very good NHLers, but no true elite talent. The top-end is expensive and doddering and you can count on two fingers the number of prospects who are a good bet to be impact NHLers at some point in the next 4 years. The goal now isn't to supplement Calgary's former superstars - it is to find their replacements, one way or the other.

News that Kipper is out for (at least) an additional 2 weeks is interesting.

Irving has, by all accounts, played better than Kipper has so far this season. Miikka has lost the Flames a game, Leland has not.

Problem is, for this team to compete for a playoff spot, they needed Kipper to play at an elite level - and another two weeks without that elite level goaltending will spell the end of any playoff hopes.

So now the question becomes...how can Feaster justify maintaining the status quo as the season falls apart before his eyes?

The blueline is coming together nicely with Bouwmeester, Brodie, Giordano and Wideman all in place. The team is heavy on the wings with talent (Hudler, Cervenka, Cammalleri, Tanguay, Baertschi, Glencross, Stempniak), Irving is proving himself to be more than competent at the NHL level and if reports are to be believed, Ramo will/should be our starter next season.

Dealing Iginla and Kiprusoff this season, coupled with another strong draft and solid summer in the UFA market by Feaster should get the Flames right back into the fold next season.

Standing still with the roster as-is though would do nothing more than hurt the organization that so desperately wants to become relevant in the NW Division again.

Would it be possible to add to the message system a way for us to not see posts by specific people if we're logged in? e.g. Perhaps an "Ignore poster" button?

It's a great sign for the site that it has grown to the point where the occasional troll slips through the cracks (none have shown up on this thread so far!). It's a lot easier to avoid "feeding the trolls" if you can block them once and be done with it.

I can't begin to see why you think otherwise. He was very good last night, was good Vs. Columbus, was good Vs. Detroit, the Vancouver game was nowhere near his fault and it could have been a lot worse (Irving made some HUGE saves).

I must half agree with this. Irving is good positionally and fairly athletic, but he has a massive achilles heel in that he overcommits harder than a serial monogamist. The shootout made that painfully obvious (although holy crap, Parise and Koivu are good in the shootout), but it was quite evident numerous times during the game when he'd spit out a rebound and there would be two feet of open net in that exact direction; same goes for the goal he let in.

Kent: general consensus seems to be that the Flames are somewhere between "okay" and "crap" (depending which camp you ask). I mentioned this in another thread, but from what I can see, the Flames look like they're top 10 in outshooting at ES (via BtN), which indicates a team a little better than just "okay". It is a small sample, but is there something I'm missing?

If you just hadn't stuck the 'more than' in there, I would have let it go. It's more than the three games you mention. Goaltending is almost all mental. His comments consistently make me think he doesn't have the mental makeup. Definitely nothing I've seen or heard from him have changed that opinion.

Top-10 for now. I expect that to regress once the Flames face more teams, particularly on the road and especially because Backlund is out of the line-up. Their outshooting is almost completely based on middle-tier guys like Backs, Stemps, Brodie, etc.

The big guns are once again middling and that makes it tough to maintain good numbers once you start facing good teams.

Kind of figured Kipper's injury was worse. The thought of going 2 more weeks at least plus reacclimatizing with the future schedule we have in Feb & early, ohh boy, that truly was a panick move. Rightfully so, 2 goalies with game experience you can count on 2 hands is trouble. By the time Kipper is back we could be literally mathematically eliminated. I still would have liked to throw Irv & Taylor to the test but I understand why they did it. Irv played good last night but his inexperience in the shootout sealed last nights deal.

Kent, totally defend everything you say about the approach to the future. Wideman & Hudler, along with Brodie, Backlund, Sven, Cervenka has given us some that we have decent pieces to rebound with quickly. Thing I think is, if we did trade Kipper & Iggy, then I think we get lean & give ourselves Cap room. I would entertain offers on JBO & Cammi as well. That frees up about 35% of next years cap space & then see who is in cap hell next summer & try to do some rape & pillaging.

Since we're talking about this, I also think it would be nice to see who a poster cheers for. Ex. below my name it would say "Flames", below RexLibris it would say "Oilers." Or something along those lines.

Somethimes its hard to decipher where a poster is coming from in their comments. Just a thought.

Given that the ship has sailed on any "significant" return for Iggy, especially in light of his recent play and perceived "lost a step".

What do the flames offer him in the way of an extension? If they get down to that negotiation post haste and find a very wide chasm between flames money and Iggy camp money then in effect its easy. Take what you can get and hope it turns out better than the bags of pucks the Oilers got for Smyth from the Isles.

Also.... I find it very indicative of the empowerment of the idiot in media when Rhett the human pilon can hold forth on the perceived "leadership" failings of Jarome Iginla. Yes; he is entitled to his opinion, but suffice it to say there is a huge credibility issue in my attempts to digest said commentary on a legitimate level.

~no idea why~

CLEARLY Rhett is auditioning/begging for a CBC job. So far... hes a front runner.

Since we're talking about this, I also think it would be nice to see who a poster cheers for. Ex. below my name it would say "Flames", below RexLibris it would say "Oilers." Or something along those lines.
Somethimes its hard to decipher where a poster is coming from in their comments. Just a thought.

Would our record be much worse with the Iggy and Kipper, probably a little but what’s the difference between 10th and 12th if you're not making the playoffs?

Surely we could spend 15.7 million more effectively (Iggy, Kipper, Stajan after buy-out, Comeau, Begin, Taylor, and either MacDonald or Irving).

That would take use to 50 million next year 14 million under the cap, we could take on other teams salary with draft picks added of course for doing so. Trade Iggy and Kipper, buy out Stajan. Grab a couple free agents in the off-season for 2-3 yr deals that can fill holes.

The real value of Rhett Warrener on the radio is that he can speak from the gut and say things that media people can't.

What he said today wasn't the most diplomatic, but how can you disagree? He's played and traveled and partied with Iginla more than anyone else who is willing to talk. I like what he said, it sounded bad cuz it was the truth.

The injuries to Kipper and Backlund may give management another 'Sutter' excuse to avoid any rebuild. Instead of being one player away from making the playoffs / being a contender, its going to be 'if it wasn't for the injury to Kipper and Backlund'...
Honestly, its management by 'Osterich', bury your head in the sand and pretend that everything is ok. This club will resign Iggy and likely Kipper and will forge ahead regardless...

I completely agree with the sentiment of this article, (and yes Kent, I read it).

According to Fan960 their were 16 scouts in town last night. Cammalleri, Baertschi, Kipprusoff are out. There simply aren't many interesting players that would create that kind of interest. IMO the players of interest would be Iginla, Bouwmeester and Cervenka (since he is an unknown quantity).

If the slide goes further and playoffs become more and more unlikely, I see Iginla asking for a trade.

I agree with a lot of this piece Kent except the part about being 'not that bad'. This is the NHL. There will be high level playing and bright spots on every team. The woulda-shoulda-couda's apply to all team (bad luck, puck luck, etc.). A team's record, in the end, is all they are measured on. And right now (an from day 1 of the season) this is a very bad team relative to their NHL peers. The Oilers are living proof that a blow up is not a good option. It takes smart on-the-fly management as you alluded to (not winning the lottery and hoping you hit the jackpot). Measure change in 1/2 seasons or calendar years. How have the Flames changed since this time last year? Better in some areas, worse in others, steady decline in the standings. Until Iggy and Kipper move on, the spiral will be downward. It's time. Oh boy, is it time.

Sure but you need to take a long view when assessing a team's true talent Derzie. The Flames are cold right now and some of that is the team's true talent level + depth problems. But they could just as easily have a a vastly superior record for no reason other than better luck, like a hot streak from Kipper.

This goes equally when the team is humming along and accruing points above their true talent level. The Flames have had two such extended periods over the two previous seasons (both around Jan-Feb) which caused fans and decision makers to wonder if Calgary really was better than they thought.

They weren't.

But they aren't this bad either. Their percentages will rebound at some point, their record will normalize. That won't chance my ultimate point though.

"This is predicated on the conditioned notion that the Flames simply can't compete without Iginla on the roster; that he remains the center tent pole of the Flames big top".

I can't believe I'm about to say this but here it goes.

While listening to Walker and Boomer this morning talking about what the Flames look like minus Iginla, I found myself actually agreeing with them. *spit*

Iggy is 6th in Flames scoring and there have been a few nights now where people sarcastically questioned whether he was in fact playing.

Walker had said, how do the Flames look if in fact he wasn't playing, and the answer was, the same. Can't say I disagree with that.

Walker then went on to say that so if the Flames trade Iggy for picks and players, and the player doesn't work out, what do the Flames look like then? The answer is again, the same, and again I agree. [That was painful]

I mainly agree with you article. I don't think a blow it to the ground rebuild is necessary, and the direction of the team is somewhat encouraging. Likewise I don't see trading Iggy as some sort of acceptance of an Oiler style 5 year tank job.

That said, the thing I don't understand from you and many others is the aversion to going for a lotto pick this year. I would absolutely love to continue to see the strong underlying numbers, learn Hartley's system, develop some youth AND get Nate McKinnon. This would make our rebuild be 1 year.

I understand the argument about how you can't ask players to lose. Of course you can't. But I don't understand why Featser feels the constant need to plug holes with veteran waiver pickups in an attempt to hang on. Why couldn't we trade Iggy, Kipper and maybe a few others we feel aren't part of the future. And replace them from within. We get to see what we have in Irving. We get to develop players and put them into roles they aren't used to. It tests them out and helps access what we have. AND it most likely will result in us falling into the lottery.

I just don't understand the people who want to keep plugging holes with temporary fixes and try to claw into 9th or 10th place. Would it be so hard to have some patience and write this season off completely and aim to reset Sept 2013 with a new leader, a fresh start and Nate McKinnon.

I have no aversion for a lotto pick, as long as it happens organically and doesn't occur because the club trades all of it's quality players.

It's possible it will happen if the Flames bad percentages continue for much longer. Plus, another injury to a top-6 forward like Tanguay with Backlund already out would make winning that much tougher without having the decision makers tank the thing on purpose.

I have no aversion for a lotto pick, as long as it happens organically and doesn't occur because the club trades all of it's quality players.

It's possible it will happen if the Flames bad percentages continue for much longer. Plus, another injury to a top-6 forward like Tanguay with Backlund already out would make winning that much tougher without having the decision makers tank the thing on purpose.

Well of course you don't have an aversion to a lotto pick once we had one. Who wouldn't want one!

I guess what I meant is an aversion to accepting the process it may require to attain a lotto pick. Where we differ is that some want to still try to compete and if things sour and the chips fall a certain way then be happy with a lotto pick. On the flip side we can accept it NOW, accept our slow start and injuries and make subtle moves to start thinking about next year instead of next game. Stop filling holes with waiver pick ups or thinking about trades to help the team now.

I don't suggest we trade away every good player. I'm just suggesting we trade away Iggy as well as 1-2 others we decide have no long term future on the team. Then, MOST IMPORTANTLY, do not replace them yet. Trades should involve draft picks and/or prospects only. Its a proactive step that helps us develop our prospects, assess our team and secure a lotto pick.

Instead of just seeing where the chips fall and being happy with the outcome.

I think the point is that trading away Iggy and Kipper and replacing them from within won't make Calgary a lottery team.

I disagree. Sure Iggy isn't 30 goal superstar Iggy, but to suggest his loss, with an AHL replacement wouldn't make the team worse is a bit much. Same with Kipper.

This team is doing a pretty good job of getting into the lottery with those guys. Unless you think Iggy is so bad that he is detrimental to the team.... I can't imagine this team not finishing bottom 5 if we play Irving every game and trade Iggy for draft picks.

Maybe they will do awesome, kids will step up and over-perform and Irving will be lights out and our new #1 goalie. If that's the case so be it. That wouldn't be a terrible outcome....

The Flames have branded themselves so intricately with Iginla that the darker side of that relationship is now coming home to roost. I've been kicking around the post-Iginla identity idea for awhile now, wondering what it might look like. Not being in the city and having that sort of immersion to the fan base, though, it requires comparison and contrast.

In Edmonton, the loss of iconic players, leaders and hockey heroes, resulted in a long stretch of reflection and re-orientation to a new normal.

It might take something similar in Calgary. What I do fear, though, is management seeking to deflect potential bad feelings by anointing the returning assets as the heirs apparent to Iginla. No player should be saddled with that kind of baggage as a new arrival.

I disagree. Sure Iggy isn't 30 goal superstar Iggy, but to suggest his loss, with an AHL replacement wouldn't make the team worse is a bit much. Same with Kipper.

This team is doing a pretty good job of getting into the lottery with those guys. Unless you think Iggy is so bad that he is detrimental to the team.... I can't imagine this team not finishing bottom 5 if we play Irving every game and trade Iggy for draft picks.

Maybe they will do awesome, kids will step up and over-perform and Irving will be lights out and our new #1 goalie. If that's the case so be it. That wouldn't be a terrible outcome....

I'm not saying losing him won't have any impact, but if you agree with Iginla's suggested GVT in this article, then he's worth about 2 wins over a replacement level player. That won't make a middling team a lottery team.

As for Kipper, he's a career average goaltender so unless Irving/Macdonald/whoever gets lit up all season, then letting him go shouldn't have that tremendous of an impact either.

Given that the ship has sailed on any "significant" return for Iggy, especially in light of his recent play and perceived "lost a step".

What do the flames offer him in the way of an extension? If they get down to that negotiation post haste and find a very wide chasm between flames money and Iggy camp money then in effect its easy. Take what you can get and hope it turns out better than the bags of pucks the Oilers got for Smyth from the Isles.

Also.... I find it very indicative of the empowerment of the idiot in media when Rhett the human pilon can hold forth on the perceived "leadership" failings of Jarome Iginla. Yes; he is entitled to his opinion, but suffice it to say there is a huge credibility issue in my attempts to digest said commentary on a legitimate level.

~no idea why~

CLEARLY Rhett is auditioning/begging for a CBC job. So far... hes a front runner.

I heard the comments this morning from Rhett. While you can quibble about the credibility of the source, there have been lots of informal comments about the perceived leadership of Jarome. One can quibble about their legitimacy as well. I think it was last year that Playfair was pretty candid in his comparison of Jarome to Doan.
I also heard Duhatschek also say that trading Jarome would leave a leadership void. I used to believe that. However as one looks at the record over the last few years (say 4), the only real constant on the underachieving Flames is Jarome. I am not sure how he has become this mystical leader we all give him credit for. After all, to be a great leader, don't you have to win? Phoenix wins. Leaders don’t’ cough up the puck for the first Minny goal.
Last piece of anecdotal evidence is that when the last time Jarome was injured for any length of time the team actually played better without him.
I think the flames have to move away from being Jarome Iginla and the Calgary Flames. They are likely better without him.

I'm not saying losing him won't have any impact, but if you agree with Iginla's suggested GVT in this article, then he's worth about 2 wins over a replacement level player. That won't make a middling team a lottery team.

As for Kipper, he's a career average goaltender so unless Irving/Macdonald/whoever gets lit up all season, then letting him go shouldn't have that tremendous of an impact either.

If that 'Iginla is worth 2 wins' theory is true, then we better keep quiet about it. Why would any GM give up their first rounder in 2013 for 2 wins (or is that 1 win in a 40ish game season?)? I know that playoffs may prove Iggy's true value, but that 2 game thing is kinda hard to stomach.

In general, people tend to overestimate how many wins individual players are worth in a team game. I mean, two wins above replacement for one guy in a 20+ player line-up isn't too bad. Iginla placed inside the top-100 by that measure last year.

The players with the most impact are almost always goalies by GVT...the elite guys are usually worth about 25-30 GVT a full season (so, about 6 wins). The elite skaters might get to the 20 GVT level, but then we're talking about the best in the biz.

So what are you suggesting Nate? That we keep Iggy? Re-up? Trade away more draft picks to fill in the holes and try to make a run for it with this team? How do we address #1 C of the future? How do we get some elite prospects? (don't tell me we already have elite prospects)

There is no way this team is a contender right now. None. Even a delusional fan couldn't put this team up against Pittsburgh, Chicago or Vancouver and pretend its a fair fight.

You claim we are "too good" to get a lottery pick even if we trade away our #1 goalie and captain. I'd like to know what you think is the plan forward given that we are so deep and incapable of CONTINUING to lose.

In general, people tend to overestimate how many wins individual players are worth in a team game. I mean, two wins above replacement for one guy in a 20+ player line-up isn't too bad. Iginla placed inside the top-100 by that measure last year.

The players with the most impact are almost always goalies by GVT...the elite guys are usually worth about 25-30 GVT a full season (so, about 6 wins). The elite skaters might get to the 20 GVT level, but then we're talking about the best in the biz.

Kent I tend to agree that any one player isn't that big of a piece. This has been shown on the flip side when a huge star is acquired and can't really help a struggling team.

BUT - we are in 15th place right now. The margin of victory/loss is so slim in the NHL now. I just think that Iggy's loss will have a deeper impact than you are suggesting. I also think if Iggy and 1 or two others are replaced by draft picks it will have a severe psychological impact on the team. When the Oilers traded Ryan Smyth and just replaced him from within (back 5 years ago when he was their heart and soul) they lost like 20 games in a row. I don't think I'm exaggerating, I honestly think they lost 20 in a row. Or something like that....

Good article. Agree completely. I think that it is time for the organization to move on from Iginla and Kiprusoff. I dont think that they have a chance to make the playoffs this year so moving Kiprusoff is not a big deal. Next year Ramo will come in and that was more or less going to be the end of the Kiprusoff era.

Iginla has been a shadow of himself the last few years and it is becoming painful to watch when he is placed into top line situations time and again. Time for him to move on, into a support level role in a contending organization.

The other moves I would make would be to get rid of Cammallari, Stajan, and Sarich. I would never have resigned Sarich and I think that he is too old and too slow to be on the team. I dont think very highly of Stajan and believe that Horak, Street, Walters, Kolanos could fill his spot with Jones just as easily. Cammallari is over priced, and has lost whatever sense of swagger that was making him have to prove people wrong. For what he is making the returns are not good enough for this Flames team, and he would be better suited in an organization that can put him on the second line in a support position.

Cammallari would fit into Pittsburgh or Boston, Iginla would fit into Philadelphia or San Jose, Kiprusoff would fit into San Jose or St Louis, Sarich would help out a team like Ottawa or Philadelphia, and Stajan would be okay in St Louis or Vancouver.

Almost everybody can come to the agreement that Iginla needs to be moved, either for his sake or for the team, or both. The bigger problem is what do you get back for him? People that believe we are going to get a young player, top prospect, and first round pick are dreaming, because I dont think that will happen. I am not sure if you would be able to two of those back.

Come the end of March, the market is going to be based on the teams with injury needs, and a market will be there for the Flames to cash in. Sad thing is that the Flames will be in the 12th spot and be buyers because they think "intellectually" that they "honestly" have a chance to make the playoffs.

Kent I tend to agree that any one player isn't that big of a piece. This has been shown on the flip side when a huge star is acquired and can't really help a struggling team.

BUT - we are in 15th place right now. The margin of victory/loss is so slim in the NHL now. I just think that Iggy's loss will have a deeper impact than you are suggesting. I also think if Iggy and 1 or two others are replaced by draft picks it will have a severe psychological impact on the team. When the Oilers traded Ryan Smyth and just replaced him from within (back 5 years ago when he was their heart and soul) they lost like 20 games in a row. I don't think I'm exaggerating, I honestly think they lost 20 in a row. Or something like that....

I think we have more leadership than Iggy on the team than when the Oilers had when they traded Smyty; Gio, Tangs etc.

So what are you suggesting Nate? That we keep Iggy? Re-up? Trade away more draft picks to fill in the holes and try to make a run for it with this team? How do we address #1 C of the future? How do we get some elite prospects? (don't tell me we already have elite prospects)

There is no way this team is a contender right now. None. Even a delusional fan couldn't put this team up against Pittsburgh, Chicago or Vancouver and pretend its a fair fight.

You claim we are "too good" to get a lottery pick even if we trade away our #1 goalie and captain. I'd like to know what you think is the plan forward given that we are so deep and incapable of CONTINUING to lose.

I'd just like to hear your plan for the next 5-10 years.

:)

If I had it my way we would have traded Iginla 3 years ago and Kipper this past offseason.

I'm not saying that we have a cup contender on our hands, I'm just trying to convey the message that I think Kent was trying to convey. Trading Iginla and Kipper won't sink this team.

In fact, at the beginning of this season I was hoping that we'd lose out and draft high because I thought that from a dollars perspective, if the flames iced a losing team, it would have minimal impact in a shortened season. Couple that with the draft being as strong as it is,and this could be the ideal year to launch a quick turn around.

BUT... I don't think that moving Iggy and Kipper will make that happen. In fact I think the skill level across this team is too balanced for any two players to have that sort of impact this year.

They did, but that's because the Oilers were terrible. They ran into injuries and a bad run of percentages anyways.

As for trading Iginla, Flames would ideally hold out for the deadline, when I assume the fate of the team will be more or less set. Even if it isn't by then, the effect of one guy for the last couple weeks of the season is pretty minimal, outside of, say, replacing a Dominik Hasek with Vesa Toskala.

A guy like Iginla is probably worth 2 wins over 82-games, but over something like a 10 game sample, he's probably only worth 1.5 goals more than a replacement level player on average.

If I had it my way we would have traded Iginla 3 years ago and Kipper this past offseason.

I'm not saying that we have a cup contender on our hands, I'm just trying to convey the message that I think Kent was trying to convey. Trading Iginla and Kipper won't sink this team.

In fact, at the beginning of this season I was hoping that we'd lose out and draft high because I thought that from a dollars perspective, if the flames iced a losing team, it would have minimal impact in a shortened season. Couple that with the draft being as strong as it is,and this could be the ideal year to launch a quick turn around.

BUT... I don't think that moving Iggy and Kipper will make that happen. In fact I think the skill level across this team is too balanced for any two players to have that sort of impact this year.

I wanted to trade Iggy and Kipper last year.... Hear on there.

I guess the general disagreement is just the impact of Iggy/Kipper. I think trading those 2 would hurt us 10% which would be enough to sink into the lottery. I guess there is no way to prove it either way.

If your assessment that we are too good to suck, but not a contender is true, and there is nothing we can do about it not even trading our #1 goalie and captain... well then. F Bombs. Good job Feaster. You've built the perfect team that to middle in mediocrity forever....

Not a contender, but too good to get a high draft pick. Sound familiar?